Flash, Harry, John, Peter. Four guys between three movies. She threw her feminine wiles around like ninja stars. She used guys like security blankets to make herself feel better. Never gave a damn about their feelings. Just her own.

__________________
"Sometimes I remember it one way. Sometimes another. If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

Flash, Harry, John, Peter. Four guys between three movies. She threw her feminine wiles around like ninja stars. She used guys like security blankets to make herself feel better. Never gave a damn about their feelings. Just her own.

Yeah, in general I liked the Rami Spider-Man but I never really liked his MJ. I read Ultimate Spider-Man so I don't know alot about 616 MJ. Was Rami's MJ like her at all?

Yeah, in general I liked the Rami Spider-Man but I never really liked his MJ. I read Ultimate Spider-Man so I don't know alot about 616 MJ. Was Rami's MJ like her at all?

In a word, no. There were some minor flashes of the character however Raimi's MJ was not at all like 616. MJ was a fun, party girl who loved to dance and was into music...on the surface. Learning more about her, she had great strength...she gave up on her dreams to take care of her sick mother only to try and take them up again after her mother's passing. And as far as I know, MJ was not selfish. BTW, you should try reading 616 comics.

Flash, Harry, John, Peter. Four guys between three movies. She threw her feminine wiles around like ninja stars. She used guys like security blankets to make herself feel better. Never gave a damn about their feelings. Just her own.

LOL. O_O well put, my friend.

Since the films took place in the course of 3-4 years, I'd say it would be reasonable in real life, but not in the span of 6 hours worth of film.

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joss Whedon

Yeah [Coulson]ís dead. The entire television series is just a fever dream. Itís a Jacobís Ladder moment heís having at the point of death...

Flash, Harry, John, Peter. Four guys between three movies. She threw her feminine wiles around like ninja stars. She used guys like security blankets to make herself feel better. Never gave a damn about their feelings. Just her own.

How many guys did she see during the trilogy?
Why did Peter want to marry her after 6 months in SM3?
Why did she try to kiss Peter when she was engaged?

Did anyone else find her to be a bit of a harlot?

While I am unaware of your intentions or social views, the final statement in your post is misogynistic. Note: this criticism is not directed to you, as a person, but, the question/claim you posited at the end of the post is quite socially inappropriate. Male superheoes in cinema are given a free pass; do we shame Iron Man or Batman for the numerous one night stands they have? Secondly, dating does not equate to sex; there is no onscreen evidence that she held sexual congress with anyone. But, if she did, I return to my original question: so what? What is wrong with a woman expressing our sexuality? The infuriating tension (and double standard) in our society is that promiscuity in heteronormative men is promoted, while all of the dread/rage is evacuated into the female, as a population and idea.

Sexual intimacy is absent in the Raimi films; all of the intimacy that is present is in chronemics (time) and proximics (space.) Hence, if we examine the films with this criteria, we see that Peter is a very homosocial figure. While he does not engage in sex with other men, he spends ample time with them, especially the ones who possess sexually appealing bodies (cough, cough, Harry.) If anything, it is peculiar that he spends more time with men, whether it is Osborn, Ock, Harry, or JJJ, than he does with women. The screentime he has with the males figures definitely reinforces this; hence, Peter is a very strange figure.

Now, this not a proper critical reading of the films; I would be more detailed and jargon-oriented; my point of this post is to point out that it is wrong to evacuate dread onto the Woman, the figure and the idea, for possessing sexuality; the irony of the situation is that Raimi's films were far from possessing any traditional sexual energy associated with heternormative romances.

Again, please be careful with your wording: the Hype has a large female population, and there is no need to make them feel uncomfortable with language such as 'harlot' or shaming sexuality.

__________________
"Johnny Storm's a good-hearted kid, sure, but he has the attention span of a toaster, and he leads with his face; in Johnny's undisciplined mind, there's only a single synapse between thinking and doing. The Avengers' battle cry is "Avengers Assemble"; the Fantastic Four's is "Johnny, WAIT!"----Mark Waid

While I am unaware of your intentions or social views, the final statement in your post is misogynistic. Note: this criticism is not directed to you, as a person, but, the question/claim you posited at the end of the post is quite socially inappropriate. Male superheoes in cinema are given a free pass; do we shame Iron Man or Batman for the numerous one night stands they have? Secondly, dating does not equate to sex; there is no onscreen evidence that she held sexual congress with anyone. But, if she did, I return to my original question: so what? What is wrong with a woman expressing our sexuality? The infuriating tension (and double standard) in our society is that promiscuity in heteronormative men is promoted, while all of the dread/rage is evacuated into the female, as a population and idea.

Sexual intimacy is absent in the Raimi films; all of the intimacy that is present is in chronemics (time) and proximics (space.) Hence, if we examine the films with this criteria, we see that Peter is a very homosocial figure. While he does not engage in sex with other men, he spends ample time with them, especially the ones who possess sexually appealing bodies (cough, cough, Harry.) If anything, it is peculiar that he spends more time with men, whether it is Osborn, Ock, Harry, or JJJ, than he does with women. The screentime he has with the males figures definitely reinforces this; hence, Peter is a very strange figure.

Now, this not a proper critical reading of the films; I would be more detailed and jargon-oriented; my point of this post is to point out that it is wrong to evacuate dread onto the Woman, the figure and the idea, for possessing sexuality; the irony of the situation is that Raimi's films were far from possessing any traditional sexual energy associated with heternormative romances.

Again, please be careful with your wording: the Hype has a large female population, and there is no need to make them feel uncomfortable with language such as 'harlot' or shaming sexuality.

Well done, your actually one of the few people on the Internet to convince me that I'm wrong. While I still think it was odd about the way that she had intimate moments with other people your right that we never know if they had sex. I used harlot as I thought it was more respectful than certain other words.
Oddly though, Of all my thoughts and feelings about the Rami Parker I never got an idea that there was a slight chance he was homosexual...

While I am unaware of your intentions or social views, the final statement in your post is misogynistic. Note: this criticism is not directed to you, as a person, but, the question/claim you posited at the end of the post is quite socially inappropriate. Male superheoes in cinema are given a free pass; do we shame Iron Man or Batman for the numerous one night stands they have? Secondly, dating does not equate to sex; there is no onscreen evidence that she held sexual congress with anyone. But, if she did, I return to my original question: so what? What is wrong with a woman expressing our sexuality? The infuriating tension (and double standard) in our society is that promiscuity in heteronormative men is promoted, while all of the dread/rage is evacuated into the female, as a population and idea.

Sexual intimacy is absent in the Raimi films; all of the intimacy that is present is in chronemics (time) and proximics (space.) Hence, if we examine the films with this criteria, we see that Peter is a very homosocial figure. While he does not engage in sex with other men, he spends ample time with them, especially the ones who possess sexually appealing bodies (cough, cough, Harry.) If anything, it is peculiar that he spends more time with men, whether it is Osborn, Ock, Harry, or JJJ, than he does with women. The screentime he has with the males figures definitely reinforces this; hence, Peter is a very strange figure.

Now, this not a proper critical reading of the films; I would be more detailed and jargon-oriented; my point of this post is to point out that it is wrong to evacuate dread onto the Woman, the figure and the idea, for possessing sexuality; the irony of the situation is that Raimi's films were far from possessing any traditional sexual energy associated with heternormative romances.

Again, please be careful with your wording: the Hype has a large female population, and there is no need to make them feel uncomfortable with language such as 'harlot' or shaming sexuality.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedBlueWonder

Well done, your actually one of the few people on the Internet to convince me that I'm wrong. While I still think it was odd about the way that she had intimate moments with other people your right that we never know if they had sex. I used harlot as I thought it was more respectful than certain other words.
Oddly though, Of all my thoughts and feelings about the Rami Parker I never got an idea that there was a slight chance he was homosexual...

Well, I see that RBW has already responded apologetically. But you kinda jumped the gun in assuming he wouldn't feel the same about a man who dates every woman in his life. Of course the specific word "harlot" may not be applicable if that was the case. Food for thought.

Anyway, this reminded me of

VIDEO-CLick to Watch!:

__________________

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joss Whedon

Yeah [Coulson]ís dead. The entire television series is just a fever dream. Itís a Jacobís Ladder moment heís having at the point of death...

Sexual intimacy is absent in the Raimi films; all of the intimacy that is present is in chronemics (time) and proximics (space.) Hence, if we examine the films with this criteria, we see that Peter is a very homosocial figure. While he does not engage in sex with other men, he spends ample time with them, especially the ones who possess sexually appealing bodies (cough, cough, Harry.) If anything, it is peculiar that he spends more time with men, whether it is Osborn, Ock, Harry, or JJJ, than he does with women. The screentime he has with the males figures definitely reinforces this; hence, Peter is a very strange figure.

You didn't type this with a straight face, did you? Because Peter simply from the dialogue doesn't spend anymore time with the male figures he's acquainted with than MJ. In fact it's very clearly explained that at most points MJ is the only one Peter devotes his free time to. Aside from Aunt May- unless you want to present an incest innuendo as well.

Sexual intimacy is absent (although not really, how many thought the upside kiss was the hottest ever on film?) because he knows these are movies that people will be taking their children to see. And perhaps being a father himself, doesn't feel the need to have Peter screwing MJ and whomever else may wander into his web.

In Spidey 2, Harry also says he hasn't seen much of Peter: "Taking Pictures of Spider-Man?" And JJJ and Ock? REALLY? He meets with Ock all of one time before the accident. JJJ? He's his BOSS. It would require that they spend some time together to get assignments and you know, get paid. Why didn't you lump Robbie in there? Although there are also the relationships Peter has with Betty (She's very clearly attracted to him), Ursula and Gwen. So why would you focus on a possible gay theme rather than Peter being a womanizer? Women are certainly his focus as he's strutting down the street in 3. Maybe he actually did take a few of them up on their requests for Spidey to carry them off.

__________________Kwai Cheng: Old man, how is it that you hear these things?Master Po: Young man, how is it that you do not?

Yes. Damn her. Damn that ***** Mary-Jane for DARING to date a perfectly reasonable amount of men within the span of three years! She's a viscious **** for having any kind of agency as human being whatsoever! She is a woman and has NO RIGHT to do anything for herself or make ANY choices AT ALL! She also doesn't get to be angry, upset, agitated, jealous or emotionally conflicted in any way, shape or form in regards to any man. Because, ya know, she's a woman.

You should be ashamed of yourself. That goes to anyone who agrees with this as well.

Yes. Damn her. Damn that ***** Mary-Jane for DARING to date a perfectly reasonable amount of men within the span of three years! She's a viscious **** for having any kind of agency as human being whatsoever! She is a woman and has NO RIGHT to do anything for herself or make ANY choices AT ALL! She also doesn't get to be angry, upset, agitated, jealous or emotionally conflicted in any way, shape or form in regards to any man. Because, ya know, she's a woman.

You should be ashamed of yourself. That goes to anyone who agrees with this as well.

Yes. Damn her. Damn that ***** Mary-Jane for DARING to date a perfectly reasonable amount of men within the span of three years! She's a viscious **** for having any kind of agency as human being whatsoever! She is a woman and has NO RIGHT to do anything for herself or make ANY choices AT ALL! She also doesn't get to be angry, upset, agitated, jealous or emotionally conflicted in any way, shape or form in regards to any man. Because, ya know, she's a woman.

You should be ashamed of yourself. That goes to anyone who agrees with this as well.

She treats other people around her like dirt without a thought for anyone's feelings except her own. She throws her feminine wiles around like ninja stars. In Spider-Man 1 alone she goes from Flash to Harry, to kissing Spider-Man while she's with Harry, to trying to be with Peter at the end.

Then in Spider-Man 2 she's engaged to John Jameson, while trying to get with Peter behind John's back, then she leaves John at the altar.

Then we have Spider-Man 3, where she is by far at her worst. She tells Peter to tell her he loves her, and then never says it back to him when he does. She gets angry at him when he tries to reassure her about the bad review she gets. She throws him a hateful jealous look when she realizes the crowd outside her theater are clapping for Spidey and not her. She doesn't tell Peter she got fired and then gets all upset when she claims he doesn't understand how she feels.

She gets annoyed and jealous that he did the sacred upside down kiss with Gwen for a publicity stunt, but it's ok for her to use the kiss on John Jameson, and that was a private intimate kiss. Should Peter get annoyed every time she kisses a guy in a play?

She gives into Harry's pathetic threat and dumps Peter. Harry doesn't threaten her life, or Aunt May's or anyone else's. Just Peter's. She knows first hand Peter is more than able to deal with Harry since she's seen him take on Green Goblin and Doc Ock successfully. Instead of just telling Peter what Harry is doing she breaks Peter's heart instead. What's even worse is that Harry can still try and kill Peter after this anyway.

She kisses Harry when she's with Peter. She's finally with the guy she's supposed to love and she still ends up kissing another guy anyway.

Awful character. Possibly the worst superhero love interest ever.

__________________
"Sometimes I remember it one way. Sometimes another. If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

She treats other people around her like dirt without a thought for anyone's feelings except her own. She throws her feminine wiles around like ninja stars. In Spider-Man 1 alone she goes from Flash to Harry, to kissing Spider-Man while she's with Harry, to trying to be with Peter at the end.

Then in Spider-Man 2 she's engaged to John Jameson, while trying to get with Peter behind John's back, then she leaves John at the altar.

Then we have Spider-Man 3, where she is by far at her worst. She tells Peter to tell her he loves her, and then never says it back to him when he does. She gets angry at him when he tries to reassure her about the bad review she gets. She throws him a hateful jealous look when she realizes the crowd outside her theater are clapping for Spidey and not her. She doesn't tell Peter she got fired and then gets all upset when she claims he doesn't understand how she feels.

She gets annoyed and jealous that he did the sacred upside down kiss with Gwen for a publicity stunt, but it's ok for her to use the kiss on John Jameson, and that was a private intimate kiss. Should Peter get annoyed every time she kisses a guy in a play?

She gives into Harry's pathetic threat and dumps Peter. Harry doesn't threaten her life, or Aunt May's or anyone else's. Just Peter's. She knows first hand Peter is more than able to deal with Harry since she's seen him take on Green Goblin and Doc Ock successfully. Instead of just telling Peter what Harry is doing she breaks Peter's heart instead. What's even worse is that Harry can still try and kill Peter after this anyway.

She kisses Harry when she's with Peter. She's finally with the guy she's supposed to love and she still ends up kissing another guy anyway.

Awful character. Possibly the worst superhero love interest ever.

Well, that would be your first mistake: Seeing her as a love interest at all. She's an equal character within the overall story. She's no more a simple love interest than Harry or Peter are. That's what's so great. And it's also what doesn't make her character "AWFUL!". How old are you, by the way? You don't like her like her, so she's "AWFFUUULLLL!!!!!" :'( :@ , nope, sorry buddy, that's not how it works. "She throws feminine wiles around like ninja stars." In one general direction at a time? Saying that more than once isn't gonna make it true. MJ has no prior relationship to Peter or Harry at the time when they've both fallen for her. She flirts with Peter a bit when he shows interest in their fifth scene together, but nothing else. And there's nothing wrong with MJ breaking up with Flash and going out with Harry. She certainly doesn't "throw" anything around by doing so. So, I can only assume you mean the rain scene, where there were 2, count em', 2 parties involved, both participating in the kiss that took place there. She kisses Spider-Man because her relationship with Harry isn't working. There's an emotional disconnect between them you see. They're too much alike. Both children of distant fathers. So naturally she starts spin out of it a little. I'd say they'd been dating for a month, maybe two. But then things fall through and she gravitates to Peter. It's really all about her character journey throughout SM1 where she has to discover the kind of love she wants and needs in her life. She goes from Flash-a guy who probably didn't put too much thought into her feelings as a person-to Harry-who is nice and good to her, but just can't engage emotionally with her in the right way, as shown in the where his answer to her nearly

Well, that would be your first mistake: Seeing her as a love interest at all. She's an equal character within the overall story. She's no more a simple love interest than Harry or Peter are.

She's the love interest. She's there as the object of Peter's romantic affections. That's her role in the story. She's the girl he wants. That and being the damsel in distress.

Quote:

And it's also what doesn't make her character "AWFUL!".

Explain please.

Quote:

How old are you, by the way?

Old enough to know a bad selfish person when I see one.

Quote:

You don't like her like her, so she's "AWFFUUULLLL!!!!!"

Correct. For valid reasons.

Quote:

nope, sorry buddy, that's not how it works.

Yes, it does when it's the truth, which in this case it is.

Sorry buddy.

Quote:

"She throws feminine wiles around like ninja stars." In one general direction at a time?

Yes. In each movie she's with one guy put somehow always ends up locking lips with another guy.

Quote:

Saying that more than once isn't gonna make it true.

I know that. It's already true. I'm just reiterating the fact.

Quote:

MJ has no prior relationship to Peter or Harry at the time when they've both fallen for her.

So?

Quote:

She flirts with Peter a bit when he shows interest in their fifth scene together, but nothing else.

That's not the point. In the same movie she dumps Flash, then in the blink of an eye she's with Harry, then she's declaring she thinks she's in love with Spider-Man, then she's saying she's in love with Peter.

Feminine wiles flinging around left, right, and center in SM-1.

Quote:

And there's nothing wrong with MJ breaking up with Flash and going out with Harry.

Of course not, if she's actually genuinely romantically interested in Harry, which she clearly wasn't.

Quote:

She certainly doesn't "throw" anything around by doing so. So, I can only assume you mean the rain scene, where there were 2, count em', 2 parties involved, both participating in the kiss that took place there.

I'm talking about how she just throws herself into relationships with guys who are obviously under the impression that she likes them. Where would they get that idea I wonder?

Quote:

She kisses Spider-Man because her relationship with Harry isn't working.

If your relationship with someone isn't working then you end it before you go kissing other guys.

Quote:

There's an emotional disconnect between them you see. They're too much alike. Both children of distant fathers. So naturally she starts spin out of it a little.

I don't care about the reasons why she isn't interested in Harry. He was genuine in his feelings for her, he even told Peter so. If MJ wasn't feeling the same way, then she should have ended it.

But she didn't care. She uses guys to fill in her own selfish insecurities. Just like she agreed to marry John when she obviously did not love him. She just did it because Peter wasn't there for her. John was just another security blanket.

Quote:

It's really all about her character journey throughout SM1 where she has to discover the kind of love she wants and needs in her life.

By walking all over guys to do it? She didn't learn a thing in SM-1. She used another guy in Spider-Man 2. Only this one she agreed to marry.

She a selfish girl who only cares about her own feelings. She never stops for a moment to think what her actions are doing to these guys who think she loves them as much as they do her.

__________________
"Sometimes I remember it one way. Sometimes another. If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

She gets annoyed and jealous that he did the sacred upside down kiss with Gwen for a publicity stunt, but it's ok for her to use the kiss on John Jameson, and that was a private intimate kiss. Should Peter get annoyed every time she kisses a guy in a play?

.

I don't get how people still try to equate the two.

With MJ,she was basically "testing" her feelings for John (her fiance,mind you) by seeing if she could feel the same passion for him that she did with Spider-Man, (remember,she didn't even know he was Peter at the time.) showing that she had her doubts as to staying with him,long before the altar.

With Peter,he was already in a steady relationship with MJ. They were going to be engaged soon.The kiss was supposedly something that was a strong bond between them, now that they were together.Not exactly the kind of thing you could get away with doing for laughs 'n giggles with a girl you hardly know- right in front of your girlfriend.

A lot of people want to dump on S-M 3's MJ/(or Dunst in general as MJ)but to me it was the most accurate portrayal of a relationship in a CBM.It's not joyride.There's lack of communication,misunderstanding,selfish ambition (for Peter and MJ both).

Peter was letting his ego get away from him.He didn't think of the consequences of anything he did as far as MJ was concerned.MJ was being unreasonable,probably because (beginning with the last scene of SM 2) she wasn't ready to handle being "Spider-Man's girlfriend".The reality of it was she left a guy with money and position for a guy in a shabby dump with a door that doesn't even work.And while she's living in the "real world" he's "living large" as Spider man.

It's basically both their fault and neither at the same time.Like real life,it's no "happily ever after" since they got together.Peter at least,makes the realization that he isn't ready.And we're left hoping at the final scene,that they have matured enough to take on their relationship from scratch.

A lot of people want to dump on S-M 3's MJ/(or Dunst in general as MJ)but to me it was the most accurate portrayal of a relationship in a CBM.It's not joyride.There's lack of communication,misunderstanding,selfish ambition (for Peter and MJ both).

How is that the most accurate portrayal of a relationship? Since when are relationships filled with lack of communication, misunderstanding, selfish ambition etc? All that shows is reasons why they shouldn't be together.

We went through all of this lack of communication and misunderstanding jazz in Spider-Man 1 and 2 when Peter was not being wholly open with MJ, and she misunderstood his secrecy for aloofness and not caring enough about her.

Been there, done that. They should be past of all of this now.

Quote:

Peter was letting his ego get away from him.

How? By being proud of himself for finally getting some recognition as the hero he is?

Quote:

He didn't think of the consequences of anything he did as far as MJ was concerned.MJ was being unreasonable,probably because (beginning with the last scene of SM 2) she wasn't ready to handle being "Spider-Man's girlfriend".

What are you talking about? What did he do that was terrible and had bad consequences on MJ? She was the one keeping secrets about being fired, and then getting annoyed at him because he didn't understand how she feels. She gets annoyed at him when he tries to reassure her after she gets a bad review.

Peter can't do right by her in her eyes no matter how much he tries.

Quote:

The reality of it was she left a guy with money and position for a guy in a shabby dump with a door that doesn't even work.And while she's living in the "real world" he's "living large" as Spider man.

That shouldn't matter one iota if she loves him. Peter could be living in a cardboard box on a sidewalk, it shouldn't make a difference to her.

The fact that you're arguing on MJ's behalf by using money and position just makes her look even more shallow.

__________________
"Sometimes I remember it one way. Sometimes another. If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

.And while she's living in the "real world" he's "living large" as Spider man.

Living large??? He's risking his life, breaking his back and had to suffer for years before a brief period when people finally cheered him on.

And even after the applause, he's still penniless.

And how weak is MJ that she always uses problems with one guy to turn to another, (Harry to Peter, Peter to John, John to Peter, Peter to Harry) rather than trying to work things out, or at least giving the guy a heads up that she's thinking of making a change.

Then there's the Harry thing in Spidey 3. Harry makes a threat, and MJ, after seeing Peter save her and the city repeatedly, accepts Harry's threat as valid and tears into Peter even though she knows that her breaking up with him would do far more damage than anything Harry could inflict on him physically. She's petty, faithless and heartless.

__________________Kwai Cheng: Old man, how is it that you hear these things?Master Po: Young man, how is it that you do not?

With MJ,she was basically "testing" her feelings for John by seeing if she could feel the same passion for him that she did with Spider-Man, (remember,she didn't even know he was Peter at the time.) showing that she had her doubts as to staying with him,long before the altar.

Baloney. She was engaged to the guy. If she has to kiss the guy upside down to know if she's in love with him or not, then she's even stupider than I gave her credit for.

But you're missing the point. She was using this so called special kiss in an intimate way on a guy she didn't even love. How is this worse than Peter using it as a publicity thing?

Quote:

With Peter,he was already in a steady relationship with MJ. They were going to be engaged soon.The kiss was supposedly something that was a strong bond between them, now that they were together.Not exactly the kind of thing you could get away with doing for laughs 'n giggles right in front of your girlfriend.

Peter obviously never held the upside down kiss in some big sacred way like MJ did in her head. Did we ever see Peter and MJ kiss this way again since? Or even speak about the kiss until then? No. MJ made some big thing about it in her head, used it on another guy herself whom she was ENGAGED to, then bit Peter's head off because he used it for a publicity stunt.

You see now why her reaction was ridiculous.

__________________
"Sometimes I remember it one way. Sometimes another. If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

Baloney. She was engaged to the guy. If she has to kiss the guy upside down to know if she's in love with him or not, then she's even stupider than I gave her credit for.

Lets be honest.She never really loved the guy.She was "marrying up"/for spite.It's not like there was this great love affair.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Joker

But you're missing the point. She was using this so called special kiss in an intimate way on a guy she didn't even love. How is this worse than Peter using it as a publicity thing?

She was in a relationship with John.They were days from being married."The kiss" is probably the least intimate thing they did.

But the overall problem was Peter letting his ego get away from him.He's kissing a strange girl in front of MJ. He didn't think that might not work out for him at home.He's pretty damned naive I guess.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Joker

Peter obviously never held the upside down kiss in some big sacred way like MJ did in her head. Did we ever see Peter and MJ kiss this way again since? Or even speak about the kiss until then? No. MJ made some big thing about it in her head, used it on another guy herself whom she was ENGAGED to, then bit Peter's head off because he used it for a publicity stunt.

I think that's part of my point.Peter clearly didn't have the kind of bond with MJ he thought he had,if something that was as important to her as "the kiss" escaped him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Joker

You see now why her reaction was ridiculous.

No,I think it's probably how most women would have reacted.
However,"the kiss" incident wasn't the only problem with their relationship in the long run.

She treats other people around her like dirt without a thought for anyone's feelings except her own. She throws her feminine wiles around like ninja stars. In Spider-Man 1 alone she goes from Flash to Harry, to kissing Spider-Man while she's with Harry, to trying to be with Peter at the end.

Then in Spider-Man 2 she's engaged to John Jameson, while trying to get with Peter behind John's back, then she leaves John at the altar.

Then we have Spider-Man 3, where she is by far at her worst. She tells Peter to tell her he loves her, and then never says it back to him when he does. She gets angry at him when he tries to reassure her about the bad review she gets. She throws him a hateful jealous look when she realizes the crowd outside her theater are clapping for Spidey and not her. She doesn't tell Peter she got fired and then gets all upset when she claims he doesn't understand how she feels.

She gets annoyed and jealous that he did the sacred upside down kiss with Gwen for a publicity stunt, but it's ok for her to use the kiss on John Jameson, and that was a private intimate kiss. Should Peter get annoyed every time she kisses a guy in a play?

She gives into Harry's pathetic threat and dumps Peter. Harry doesn't threaten her life, or Aunt May's or anyone else's. Just Peter's. She knows first hand Peter is more than able to deal with Harry since she's seen him take on Green Goblin and Doc Ock successfully. Instead of just telling Peter what Harry is doing she breaks Peter's heart instead. What's even worse is that Harry can still try and kill Peter after this anyway.

She kisses Harry when she's with Peter. She's finally with the guy she's supposed to love and she still ends up kissing another guy anyway.

Let's break it down. She was dating Flash Thompson is school because, I guess he was popular and she was one of the popular girls. She dumped him at graduation when she realised he was a jerk. She then starts dating Harry because presumably he asked her, not because she pursued him. I think Harry probably wanted to get one over on Pete more than he did want to be with her. I think this was mostly done as a love triangle and because she dated him in the comics. She kisses Spider-Man as a way of 'thanking him.' Some people just shake hands or buy a gift but I guess kissing is her way of thanking him.
She tells Peter she loves him because she realises no-one has looked out for her as much as he has. He tells her he only wants to be friends. She moves on and hooks up with John. (How she manges to pull a dashing astronaut I will never know.) She used John to get over Peter in this instance, but that is what many people do in real life, when they are rejected.

The real crime she makes is kissing Harry behind Peter's back in SM3 as well as not being apprecaitve and understanding of what he has to deal with on a daily basis. I think that is Mary Jane at her worst and I agree she became a hateable character in SM3. For me its more of a 'How in the heck did she pull him' and less of a 'OMG what a ****!!'